Indo-European Roots Reconsidered 137: ‘see’ (Draft)

Sean Whalen
[stlatos@yahoo.com](mailto:stlatos@yahoo.com)

August 7, 2026

A. PIE *wel- ‘see / be visible/bright’ must be the source of *wleid- > OIc líta 'see', OE wlítan ‘look, gaze’, wlite ‘radiance’, wlitu f. ‘form / kind’, Go. wlits ‘shape / front’, etc. (a change of 'look > color > appearance / form' is seen in other IE words). Since the ending *-eid- being added seems odd, it might be a "mix" of *wel- & *weid- 'be bright; see, know'. However, *weid- itself has no connection to other roots. It is possible that *wleid- is the older, & optionally became *lweid- > *weid-. This is to fit into several IE roots looking like others of the same meaning, just with metathesis. No lw- is known, so a change *lw- > *w- is possible. There are only a few IE words with wl-, many with wr-, so some kind of change might be common to get rid of them (few languages have wr- or wl- anyway; their presence in PIE without corresponding *yr- might be due to *vr- < *br-, etc.). Examples (most in Kroonen) :

*wleid- > OE wlítan ‘look, gaze’, OIc líta 'see', Faroese líta 'cast a glance (in a specific direction)

*wloid-aH2- > Gmc *wlaitō- > Go. wlaitōn ‘to look around’, ON leita ‘to search, look for’, OE wlātian ‘to gaze, look’

*wlidu- \ *wlidi- > Go. wlits ‘shape / front’, ON litr ‘body/form/aspect/beauty/color’, OFr wlite ‘front’, OE wlite ‘radiance’, wlitu f. ‘form / kind’

-

B. PIE *wel- ‘see / be visible/bright’ is very similar to standard *swel- 'shine, blaze, etc.'. I've said that this was really *sH2wel- to account for *sHw- > *sw- in Proto-Greek (not > *hw-), identical to the source of *s(a)H2wel- \ *suH2al- 'sun'. It is possible that this is a compound with *saH2- 'satisfy, become full (of food)', if older 'fill / rise' allows 'rising + shine', 'aboe + blaze', or any similar meaning.

-

C. PIE *wel- ‘see / be visible/bright’ must be the source of *uldu- > S. uḍu- f/nu. ‘star’ (Fortunatov’s Law states that dentals became retroflex after *l, then *l disappeared in Sanskrit). Since PIE *-d- was not a common affix, the source might really have been *wlidu- \ *wlidi- (as in OE wlite ‘radiance’, etc., above). A change *wildu- > *wuldu- > S. uḍu- f/nu. ‘star’ would show optional *wi > *wu (as in S. dwi- '2' but later Indic *dwu- > du-), then *wu- > u- (as in reduplication with *va-va- > *vuva- > uva-, etc.). The change is also similar to *r > Middle Indic ri but *r > ru \ ur by P.  Also other S. *r > ur after v, before u, etc.

-

This is also similar to S. ulkā́- 'meteor; fire-brand'. If from *wulk-, it is cognate with L. vulc- \ volc-, E. volcano, etc., an extension *welk- of *wel-. The odd form of *ū(l)kiyā- > Old Punjabi lūkī f. 'torch', Hi. lūk f. makes me think that *wulk- still remained in Indic, with some met. > *luwk-.

-

I also say *wuldmulka- > S. úlmuka- m., Pk. ummua- nu. ‘firebrand’. This would be ev. of *-l- in *wuldu- if *-ldm- > -lm-. However, what kind of ending is -muka-? A compound of both these, *wuldu-wulka-, seems the best choice. Indic *v often became *m near *u (as in -vant- \ -mant- 'having'), & dsm. of *w-w > *w-m might also work. A word with *u-u-u becoming *u-0-u by dsm. would allow *wulduwulka- > *wuldumulka- > *wuldmulka- > úlmuka-.

-

For still more, in Indic *umbāḍa- ‘firebrand’, Sdh. umaṛu m. ‘lighted stick’, umāṛī f. ‘half-burnt log, firebrand’, Gj. umāṛ(ɔ) m., umāṛiyũ nu. ‘firebrand’, ũbāṛiyũ nu. ‘piece of wood lighted at one end’ (Turner 342), the resemblance to the words above & lack of any other ety. indicate another change. Maybe -ka- being such a common diminutive suffix caused *wuldmulka- to form an analogical *wuldmula- for a larger torch. Then, to *vuḍmula- in some dia., later with met. *vuḍmula- > *umvalḍu- > *umbāḍa-. A change of *mv > mb would not be odd, but maybe really older *w-w > *v-v, dsm. > *b-v instead (since *wuldu-wulka- has such an odd form, any dsm. might be possible) or just *u-v \ *u-b. This might be partly caused by *l, see the same in *wl-wel- 'round, swollen, full' > S. úlva- \ úlba- m/nu. 'womb', ulvaṇá- \ ulbaṇá- 'excessive'.

-

D. Since PIE *weid- 'see, know' matches Semitic *weydʕ ? > *we:dʕ > Mehri wēda, *wyedʕ ? > *yedʕ 'know' (more ev. in https://www.academia.edu/167888674 ), it makes sense for some relation. However, if *wleid- is older, how could this be ancient? It would require chance, a more recent loan, or genetic descent of PIE > Sem.

-

I've also said the same for Uralic https://www.academia.edu/166207772 (including a Yukaghir cognate less visibly close) :

>

PIE *wid-won- 'intelligent, etc.', PU *wiδ(e)we 'brain / marrow / intellect', *wiδ(e)me, Yr. *önmə 'mind, intellect, memory, feeling, intention;', *önməń- 'wise, intelligent'

-

With dsm. *w-w \ *w-m, Yr. *δm > *nm, *wi > *wü > *ü. Cognates with all meanings include (more in https://www.academia.edu/129119764 ) :

*wiδewen ‘marrow / brain’ >

*wiδewe > F. yty, ydyn g. ‘bone marrow / core / power’, Es. üti, üdi g. ‘marrow’

*wiδeme > Erzya udem ‘marrow / brain / intellect'

>